Only valid for active forum users. Active means at least 30 postings within the last 30 days (no spam postings). This will automatically being checked at www.starbike.com shopping basket so make sure that you are logged in at the WW board!If there does not appear a WW discount position when you check out you do not have enough postings!

...starting to move threads over from "PRO" discussion over to the "DOPE" discussion, where they are more appropriate:

stella-azzurra wrote:

Ahillock wrote:So how does an already fit and skinny Wiggins drops close to 10kg and yet his power remains the same?

Muscle mass is not a requirement to make you fast in cycling. If that was the case you would have body builders ascending alps quicker than the pro cyclists. Everyone has the same amount of muscles in their bodies. The difference is that the Wiggins of the world are better adapted to high aerobic work through training and genetics. We all can improve our aerobic capacity but we all cannot improve to the level that these guys can.There are many people that have the capability to have high aerobic thresh holds but never end up using it because they might not be interested in sports, or don't want to work for it. That's how it generally works without drugs. And by the way even with drugs the person that does not have the genetic disposition will still be slower than the person that has the genetic natural ability for high aerobic work.Conversely people who have the high aerobic ability and take drugs may or may not benefit from the drug because each drug has a different affect on each one of us.

If you're going to start moderating how about beginning with your own posts?

No, that belongs there because its a discussion of pro racing, pro results, etc.

bricky21 wrote:If you think about it the 12+ pages of doping that you complained about is probably the single longest stretch of focused discussion the Pro Cycling thread has ever had.

Not true whatsoever. Doping was discussed there before, but the page often had very long discussions and just went to shit earlier this season. Its probably because a lot of the contributors stopped posting and because we're at a point in the season where not much new is happening, but the discussion is not focused.

This is the average argument:"So and so is doping. They're riding too fast. Lance doped so you can't test anyone""They aren't riding that fast, compare to old times.""Yah, but I think they're doping because many pro cyclists doped in the past decade.""I don't think Wiggins is doping, but XXXX surely is".

Its moronic and contributes nothing. If you want discuss doping, why people might be, or evidence thereof then do it here. No one has any definitive proof of ANYTHING and have filled 12 pages with tautological b/s. There's a reason the Lance doping thread was created and is now at 20+ pages, feel free to turn this into that.

KWalker wrote:The pro thread was meant to discuss the following when the original thread was shut down:-Pro racing/results/predictions-Pro gear

Keep the rampant speculation here.

PEDs are by far the most important Pro gear.

What do you think matters more, good PEDs/doping regime which you get away with, or some frame or component which is a little lighter/more aero/stiffer/more comfortable/works better, or whatever? Duhhh.

Come on KWalker lighten up. Like it or not doping, doping accusations, and doping suspicion have been and will be part of pro cycling for a long time. If some of the posts seem silly or illegible so what? It not as if that thread isn't already full of the same. How about we leave the moderating to TP, PP, and, FB?.

I started the "PRO" thread to keep the tactics/fan chatter/etc. out of the equipment thread. Doping fits into the "non-tech" category and should be discussed in the original thread. However, I would love for a good pro equipment thread (only pics and short, relevant discussion) to get started.

Below is a quote from the first post of the "PRO" thread:

Carbon_Cowboy wrote:I went on to the Pro Team Stuff thread to look at some pics and.... Why not discuss the non-tech stuff in this tread?